Laserfiche WebLink
The board members expressed understanding of the unique challenges posed by the lot and the <br />necessity of the three-foot setback variance for the proposed single-family home. They <br />acknowledged the difficulties in obtaining a perfect solution given the lot's narrowness and <br />expressed support for the variance, considering it minimal in the context of the circumstances. <br />Additionally, they emphasized the need to consider the lot's unique characteristics and the <br />builder's efforts to address concerns raised by residents. <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />27-2024; McGillivary; 4636 Canterbury Road <br />Representative: Christian Crock with Woodland Deck <br />Ms. Seeley stated that the submission pertains to a new deck. with a single variance request for <br />an 11 -foot deviation from the code's requirement of 38 feet rear yard setback. The applicant's <br />proposal is 27 feet. Notably. the home already received a variance in March 2022 for the rear <br />yard setback, which vvas set at 41.73 feet. This variance request specifically applies to the deck. <br />Mr. Crock explained that due to the size of the lot a variance for the deck would be necessary. <br />He said that the deck comes of the house only 14 feet. so that it vvas not substantial. but <br />reiterating the uniqueness of the lot size. any size deck vyould require a variance. Ms. Seeley <br />agreed that any proposal would necessitate a variance and that the deck was small enou111 and <br />wasn't intrusive. <br />Mr. Rahm moved to approve 27-2024: MCGilllvary: 4636 Canterbury: seconded by Mr. Kovach. <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />29-2024; Rogge; 6784 Cypress Drive <br />Representative: Michael Rogge: 6784 Cypress Drive <br />Ms. Seeley stated that this was an addition on the back of the house. It was a four -foot variance <br />for rear yard setback of rear addition. Mr. Rogge shared that they had a large grovyin�a family and <br />wanted to remain in the community and needed some extra space. <br />Mr. Rahm moved to approve 29-2024, Rogge. 6784 Cypress: seconded by Mr. Kovach <br />Motion Passed: 5-0 <br />COMMERCIAL APPEALS AND REQUESTS <br />14-2024; AT&T; 26620 Lorain Road <br />Representative: Michael Gumto. Loomis Companies <br />Mr. Upton introduced this case as a 33.13 square foot sign variance for primary fayade. Code <br />permits 23 square feet. Mr. Gumto explained as the construction general contractor. they were <br />